REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – April 2019

April 22, 2019

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS:

[Australia] High Court upholds safe access zones near abortion clinics. High Court of Australia,  Kathleen Clubb v Alyce Edwards & Anor;  John Graham Preston v. Elizabeth Avery & Anor,  [2019] HCA 11,  Judgment of April 10, 2019. Decision online.    High Court Press ReleaseSummary and comment by Adrianne Walters, Senior Lawyer.

[Canada] Ministry of Health ruling: Doctors can now prescribe abortion pills without preliminary ultrasound.  Health Canada press release, April 16, 2019Safe Abortion Campaign report.

[Rwanda]  Ministry of Health ruling: Abortion approval requirement is reduced to one medical doctor. Ministerial Order N°002/MoH/2019 issued April 8, 2019.  Rwandan newspaper.  In addition, 367 women imprisoned for having or assisting abortion / infanticide were also released by presidential pardon, April 5, 2019.  Safe Abortion Campaign report.   Guardian news report.

[South Korea] Constitutional Court ordered government to decriminalize abortion within 20 weeks of gestation by Dec 31, 2020.  An indicted doctor had petitioned against the law.  New York Times report, April 11, 2019. Amicus curiae submission by UN Working Group.

SCHOLARSHIP:

“Abortion, the Disabilities of Pregnancy, and the Dignity of Risk,” by Mary Anne Case, U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 705 (2019)  Working paper.

[abortion] “Abortion, law reform and the context of decision-making,” by Heather Douglas and Katherine Kerr [Australia],  Griffith Law Review 25.1 (2016) 129-145
Review Essay, discusses 3 books.:
—-Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective (Cook Erdman & Dickens)
;
—-Law, Policy and Reproductive Autonomy (Erin Nelson) ;
—-Reproductive Freedom, Torture, and International Human Rights (Ronli Sifris)

[Australia, Northern Territory] “A Reproductive Rights Framework Supporting Law Reform on Termination of Pregnancy in the Northern Territory of Australia
by Suzanne Belton, Felicity Gerry, and Virginia Stulz, Griffith Journal of Law and Human Dignity 6.2 (2018): 25-53. Abstract and Article.

[abortion, Northern Ireland]  “Abortion in Northern Ireland and the European Convention on Human Rights: Reflections from the UK Supreme Court,” by Bríd Ní Ghráinne  and Aisling McMahon, International & Comparative Law Quarterly 68.2(Apr 2019): 477-494.  Abstract and Articlealso on SSRN.

[abortion, Uruguay] “Legal barriers to access abortion services through a human rights lens: the Uruguayan experience,” by Lucía Berro Pizzarossa, Reproductive Health Matters 26:52(2018): 151-158.  Abstract and article.

[abortion, stereotyping, Uruguay]   ‘“Women are Not in the Best Position to Make These Decisions by Themselves”: Gender Stereotypes in the Uruguayan Abortion Law’ by Lucía Berro Pizzarossa University of Oxford Human Rights Hub Journal 1 (2019): 25-54.  Abstract and article.

[conscience]  ‘Right of freedom of conscience is not absolute’, by Joan McCarthy, Nursing in General Practice, 12.1(2018): 27-28.  Abstract and article.

“Female genital mutilation/cutting in Africa: A complex legal and ethical landscape,”  by Satang Nabaneh and Adamson S. Muula, InternationalJournal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2019; 145: 253–257,  PDF at Wiley Online.   Submitted text at SSRN.

[human rights and criminal law] Beyond Virtue and Vice:  Rethinking Human Rights and Criminal Law, ed.  Alice M. Miller and Mindy Jane Roseman,  Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2019)  360 pages.  It includes:
——   Abortion as treason: Sexuality and Nationalism in France, by Mindy Jane Roseman, 158-170.
——   Harm Production: An Argument for Decriminalization, by Joanna N. Erdman, 248-268.    Book abstract and information.    Intro and excerpts from pp. 3-55 online.

[medical abortion access] “Realising the right to sexual and reproductive health: Access to essential medicines for medical abortion as a core obligation.” by Katrina Perehudoff, Lucía Berro Pizzarossa and Jelle Stekelenburg, BMC International Health and Human Rights, 18.1 (2018) [8 pages]. Article online.

[reproductive rights] “Here to Stay: The Evolution of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in International Human Rights Law,” by Lucía Berro Pizzarossa,  Laws 7.3 (2018): 1-17. Open Access Article.

JOBS

Links to employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here.

______________
Compiled by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our PublicationsInformation resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.
TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

 

 

 

 


Uruguay: Gender stereotypes in the abortion law

April 22, 2019

Congratulations to Lucía Berro Pizzarossa, LL.M., a doctoral candidate in International Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Groningen, The Netherlands, who has published several articles about abortion law.  We are pleased to circulate the abstract of her latest article, and links to some others by the same author.

Lucía Berro Pizzarossa,‘“Women are Not in the Best Position to Make These Decisions by Themselves”: Gender Stereotypes in the Uruguayan Abortion Law’ (2019) University of Oxford Human Rights Hub Journal 25-54.  Article online.

Abstract:     Efforts to protect women’s rights can cast dark shadows. Dangerous and often unnoticed stereotypes can motivate and infiltrate legal reforms. Recent changes to the law on abortion in Uruguay have been held out as a best practice model in South America.  Recognising the power of the law to shape our understandings of how people are and should be, this article aims to unpack the stereotypes on women seeking abortions in the Uruguayan legal discourse and map how the law on abortion gives legal force to these harmful stereotyped ideas.  This article analyses the parliamentary proceedings on the Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy Act. It asks: Do the debates on abortion in Uruguay reveal a cultural shift? Do members of parliament’s arguments hinge on harmful stereotypes?

In asking these questions, this article explores the extent to which a fairly liberal and widely praised domestic abortion law complies with the national and international human rights obligations to eradicate harmful gender stereotypes. Mining the rhetoric used in the parliament debates reveals the stereotyped images of women that seek abortion services that—rather than reflecting the true complexity and diverse experiences of women that seek abortion—are grounded in women’s perceived degree of deviance from gendered stereotypes, particularly those surrounding motherhood. Uruguayan abortion law, while seemingly protecting women’s rights, in fact hinges on traditional gender attitudes and stereotypes. This article provides the foundations to further develop sophisticated legal and political strategies for fulfilling women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights.

Other articles authored by Lucía Berro Pizzarossa:

Here to Stay: The Evolution of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in International Human Rights Law,” by Lucía Berro Pizzarossa, Laws, 7.3 (2018): 1-17. Open Access Article.

Realising the right to sexual and reproductive health: Access to essential medicines for medical abortion as a core obligation.” by Katrina Perehudoff, Lucía Berro Pizzarossa and Jelle Stekelenburg BMC International Health and Human Rights, 18.1 (2018) [8 pages]. Article online.

Legal barriers to access abortion services through a human rights lens: the Uruguayan experience,” by Lucía Berro Pizzarossa, Reproductive Health Matters 26:52(2018): 151-158.  Abstract and article.

“Global Survey of National Constitutions: Mapping Constitutional Commitments to Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights,” by Lucía Berro Pizzarossa and Katrina S. Perehudoff,  Health and Human Rights 19.2 (2017): 279-293. Abstract and Article.  Also published in Healthcare as a Human Rights Issue: Normative Profile, Conflicts and Implementation, ed. Sabine Klotz, Heiner Bielefeldt, Martina Schmidhuber, Andreas Frewer (Bielefeld, Germany:  Transcript Verlag, 2017) 321-346  Open Access chapter.

See also:
Gender Stereotyping: Transnational Legal Perspectives, by Rebecca J. Cook and Simone Cusack, (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010),  Book in English.
Spanish edition online: PDF

______________
Compiled by the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca   See Program website for our PublicationsInformation resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.
TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.


Australia’s highest court upholds safe access zones near abortion clinics

April 22, 2019

Congratulations and thanks to Adrianne Walters, a Senior Lawyer at the Human Rights Law Centre in Australia, which intervened in the High Court of Australia in support of Victoria’s safe access zone laws. We thank her for submitting this summary and comment about this useful decision:

High Court of Australia,  Kathleen Clubb v Alyce Edwards & Anor;  John Graham Preston v. Elizabeth Avery & Anor,  [2019] HCA 11,  Judgment of April 10, 2019. Decision online.    Press Release.

Last week, the High Court of Australia upheld laws that protect the safety, privacy and well-being of women seeking access to abortion services.  [The High Court of Australia is the supreme court in the Australian court hierarchy and the final court of appeal in Australia.]

Background to safe access zones
Safe access zones have been introduced in most states in Australia since 2013 and have ended decades of harmful anti-choice harassment and abuse outside abortion clinics. Only two states have not yet introduced them.

Most safe access zone laws in Australia create a 150-metre buffer zone outside abortion clinics in which certain behaviours are prohibited, including harassing, obstructing, intimidating and filming patients and staff.

The constitutional challenge
The safe access zone laws of two states, Victoria and Tasmania, were challenged in the High Court.

In Victoria, Mrs Kathleen Clubb was charged and convicted of engaging in prohibited behaviour in a zone; specifically, communicating about abortion in a manner “reasonably likely to cause distress or anxiety” to a couple trying to enter a clinic in Melbourne.

In Tasmania, Mr Graham Preston, was also charged and convicted with engaging in prohibited behaviour in a zone. In his case the prohibited conduct involved “a protest” about abortion that was able to be seen or heard by a person accessing a clinic.

Both Mrs Clubb and Mr Preston appealed to the High Court. They argued that the laws they were convicted under were invalid because they impermissibly burdened the freedom of political communication, which is implied in the Australian Constitution.

The High Court’s decision:
The High Court dismissed the appeals of Mrs Clubb and Mr Preston. A majority of judges upheld the validity of Victoria’s safe access zone laws (three judges declined to determine the validity question because it was not established that Mrs Clubb’s conduct involved political communication). All seven judges determined and upheld the validity of Tasmania’s laws.

In upholding the laws, the High Court recognised that while they do burden the freedom of political communication, the laws serve a critical purpose in making sure women can access the healthcare they need, and staff can carry out their work, without being harassed and abused. As one of the judges noted “women seeking an abortion and those involved in assisting or supporting them are entitled to do so safely, privately and with dignity, without haranguing”.

The High Court also found that the challenged parts of the laws were reasonably appropriate and adapted to achieving that critical purpose. In a joint judgment, three judges noted that “a measure that seeks to ensure that women seeking a safe termination are not driven to less safe procedures by being subjected to shaming behaviour or by the fear of the loss of privacy is a rational response to a serious public health issue.”

It was noted that the freedom of political communication “is not a licence to accost persons with ideas which they do not wish to hear, still less to harangue vulnerable persons entering or leaving a medical establishment for the intensely personal, private purpose of seeking lawful medical advice and assistance.”  The majority acknowledged the unique challenges faced by pregnant women confronted by extreme anti-choice activists outside clinics, noting that “it is no part of the implied freedom to guarantee a speaker an audience, much less a captive audience.”

The High Court’s decision is a big win for women’s rights in Australia. The decision confirms our right to access the healthcare we need without having to forgo our safety, privacy and dignity to get there. It means safe access zone laws are here to stay.

Related Resources:

The Human Rights Law Centre intervened in the High Court in support of Victoria’s safe access zone laws. Amicus Curiae brief.

Adrianne Walters, “Big win for women’s reproductive freedom, but still a long way to go,” Sydney Morning Herald, April 11, 2019.  Australian newspaper article.

High Court of Australia,  Kathleen Clubb v Alyce Edwards & Anor;  John Graham Preston v. Elizabeth Avery & Anor,  [2019] HCA 11,  Judgment of April 10, 2019.  Decision online.    Press Release.

Abortion Law Decisions webpage:  links to domestic, regional and international decisions, maintained by the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto    English and Spanish online.
______________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

 

 


REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – March 2019

March 15, 2019

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS:

[El Salvador] Supreme Court ordered release of another three women serving 30 years for alleged abortions.  News report, March 7, 2019.   Report from Safe Abortion.

[Germany]  In February 2019, the Bundestag revised the Criminal Code provision that prohibits the so-called “advertising” of abortions. Providers can now publicly announce, e.g. on websites, that they provide abortion care. News report, Feb 21, 2019.

[Isle of Man] In January 2019, the Abortion Reform Act 2019 allows abortion on a woman’s request in the first 14 weeks of pregnancy.  Abortion at 15-23 weeks’ gestation in cases of sexual assault, severe fatal impairment, or risk to the woman’s health.  effective May 2019.  Abortion Reform Act 2019.

Kenyan High Court upholds human and constitutional rights to maternal dignity and reproductive healthcare:   J O O (also known as J M) v Attorney General & 6 others [2018] Petition No 5 of 2014, (High Court of Kenya at Bungoma).  March 22, 2017.  Case summary by Naitore Nyamu.     Court decision.    Legal Grounds III online.

Pakistan Court Orders Implementation of Measures to Address Obstetric Fistula
CRR Press Release.

SCHOLARSHIP:

Mahmoud F. Fathalla, “Abortion and Public Health Ethics,” in: The Oxford Handbook of Public Health Ethics, ed.  Anna C. Mastroianni, Jeffrey P. Kahn, and Nancy E. Kass, Oxford Handbooks Online,  February 2019.  Article online.

[abortion law, Argentina]  “Constitutional Dialogues and Abortion Law Reform in Argentina: What’s Next?” by Paola Bergallo, featured on I-CONnect Blog, Feb. 27, 2019.  Article online.

[female circumcision]  “Circumcision, Female,” by Mahmoud F. Fathalla,  Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics, ed. Henk ten Have  (Switzerland: Springer International, 2016)  Abstract and article.   Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics.

[HIV transmission, stigma] “Expert Consensus Statement on the Science of HIV in the Context of Criminal Law” by F. Barré-Sinoussi et al.  Journal of the International AIDS Society  21 (2018): e25161  Expert Consensus Statement.      Overview in JIAS editorial.

JOBS

Links to employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here.

______________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

 

 

 

 


REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – February 2019

February 19, 2019

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS:

[abortion] Ireland – The Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act was signed into law, effective January 1, 2019.  Medical Council also deleted four of the five paragraphs dealing with abortion from its guide on professional conduct and ethics because they conflicted with the Act.  Newspaper article.

[abortion -Northern Ireland] UK Supreme Court had ruled in June ([2018] UKSC 27 (7 June 2018)  On appeal from: [2017] NICA 42that violation of European Convention on Human Rights could not be decided without at least one complainant.  On January 30, 2019,  Sara Ewart, who had once travelled for abortion of a fatally impaired fetus, launched a case that could find Northern Ireland’s abortion law in breach of the UK’s human rights commitments. She is supported by Amnesty International.  News articleAmnesty International press release.

[conscience – institutional] Chile, Constitutional Court upheld an unconstitutionality claim against the government’s new Regulations about the scope of “institutional” conscientious objection for private facilities and clinics.  STC Rol N° 5572-18-CDS / 5650-18-CDS (acumuladas). January 18, 2019.   Spanish decision  English news report.

[conscience]   Norway: Supreme Court upholds rights of doctor who refused to insert IUD.  Newspaper article.

[stigma] US:  Vending Machines Offer Emergency Contraception Without the Stigma introduced in 2012, now at several campuses, including Stanford University.   News report.

SCHOLARSHIP:

[abortion access]  Crossing Troubled Waters: Abortion in Ireland, Northern Ireland, and Prince Edward Island, ed. Colleen MacQuarrie, Fiona Bloomer, Claire Pierson and Shannon Stettner (Charlottetown, PEI, Canada: Island Studies Press, 2018). 288 pages.      Table of ContentsPublisher’s web page.

[abortion law]   “Criminal law and the risk of harm: a commentary on the impact of criminal laws on sexual and reproductive health, sexual conduct and key populations,” by Veronica Birga, Luisa Cabal, Lucinda O’Hanlon & Christina Zampas.   Reproductive Health Matters, 26.52 (2018): 33-37 Article online.

[abortion law, Argentina] Federalism, two-level games and the politics of abortion rights implementation in sub-national Argentina, by Alba Ruibal, in Reproductive Health Matters 26:54 (Nov. 2018): 137-144.   Article in English with abstracts in English. French & Spanish.

[abortion law, Argentina] “Legal obstacles and social change: strategies of the abortion rights movement in Argentina,” by Alba Ruibal and Cora Fernandez Anderson, in Politics, Groups and Identity,  preview November 2018, 17 pages.  Institutional access.   Abstract from Safe Abortion.

[abortion law, Argentina]”Federalism and subnational legal mobilization: feminist litigation strategies in Salta, Argentina,” by Alba Ruibal,  Law & Society Review,  32-page preview 29 October 2018. Institutional access.    Abstract from Safe Abortion.

[abortion law – Brazil]  Constitutionalizing Abortion in Brazil, by Marta Machado and Rebecca J. Cook, Revista de Investigações Constitucionais / Journal of Constitutional Research, vol. 5, n. 3 (set./dez. 2018) pp.185-231.  Abstract and Article PDF.   Also at SSRN.

[abortion law – Brazil and Mexico]  “Constitutionalism and rights protection in Mexico and Brazil: comparative remarks, by Francisca Pou Giménez, in Revista de Investigações Constitucionais / Journal of Constitutional Research, vol. 5, n. 3 (set./dez. 2018) pp 233-255  Abstract and article PDF.

[abortion law, Dominican Republic]  “It’s Your Decision.  It’s Your Life:  Total criminalization of abortion in the Dominican Republic.”  interviews, plus legal overview and recommendations.  (Human Rights Watch, Nov 19, 2018).   84 pages. English PDF    Spanish PDF.   Online in English.    Overview with 5-minute video.

[abortion law -Ireland]  “Abortion, the Irish Constitution, and constitutional change” by David Kenny, Revista de Investigações Constitucionais / Journal of Constitutional Research, vol. 5, n. 3 (set./dez. 2018) pp. 257-275.   Abstract and Article PDF.

[abortion law, Mexico] “Maternidad o Castigo:  La criminalización del aborto en Mexico,”  (Mexico, GIRE, 2018)  [Report in Spanish:] Informe de 72 paginas.  For executive summary in English, see: Motherhood or Punishment: The criminalization of abortion in Mexico:  English summary.

[abortion law] “Northern Ireland and Abortion Law Reform,” by Kathryn McNeilly, Fiona Bloomer and Claire Pierson,  Queen’s University, Ulster University and University of Liverpool, Sept. 2018, open access, 8 pages.  Briefing Paper.

[adolescents]  “(De)Criminalizing Adolescent Sex: A rights-based assessment of age of consent laws in Eastern and Southern Africa,” by Godfrey Dalitso Kangaude and Ann Skelton, SAGE Open (Oct-Dec 2018): 1 –12.   Article online.   Abstract.

[conscience]  “Objection ladies! Taking IPPF-EN v. Italy one step further, by Emmanuelle Bribosia, Ivana Isailovic and Isabelle  Rorive, in:  Integrated Human Rights in Practice:Rewriting Human Rights Decisions, ed. Eva Brems and Ellen Desmet (Cheltenham, UK:  Elgar, 2018).  Abstract and previous version.

[conscience]  “Religious Refusals and Reproductive Rights,” by Louise Melling, chapter 14 in:  The Conscience Wars: Rethinking the Balance between Religion, Identity, and Equality, ed. Susanna Mancini and Michel Rosenfeld (Cambridge, UK:  Cambridge University Press, 2018)  pp. 375-391.   Institutional Access.

[conscience]  “Seeking to square the circle:  Conscientious objection in Reproductive Healthcare” by Emmanuelle Bribosia and Isabelle  Rorive, chapter 15 in:  The Conscience Wars: Rethinking the Balance between Religion, Identity, and Equality, ed. Susanna Mancini and Michel Rosenfeld (Cambridge, UK:  Cambridge University Press, 2018)  pp. 392-413.  Institutional Access.    Abstract and previous version

 

[gender stereotyping, I.V. v. Bolivia, sterilization]  “The human rights impact of gender stereotyping in the context of reproductive health care,” by Ciara O’Connell and Christina Zampas,  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 144 (2019):  116–121.  PDF online here.

[maternal health] Impact of reproductive evolutionary mismatch on women’s health and the need for action and research, by Mahmoud F. Fathalla, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 144 (Feb. 2019): 129–134.  Institutional Access.  

[New book] Beyond Virtue and Vice:  Rethinking Human Rights and Criminal Law
ed.  Alice M. Miller and Mindy Jane Roseman,  Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2019)  360 pages. Book information.
Intro and chapters 1 and 3 online.
Chapters about abortion law include:
ο    “Abortion as Treason: Sexuality and nationalism in France” by Mindy Jane Roseman
ο    “Criminal Law, Activism and Sexual and Reproductive Justice: What we can learn from the sex selection campaign in India,” by Geetanjali Misra and Vrinda Marwah
ο    “Harm Production: An argument for decriminalization,”  by Joanna N. Erdman

JOBS

Links to employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here.

Senior Vice President, Global Legal Program, Center for Reproductive Rights, New York, USA.    Job details and application form.

______________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

 

 

 

 


Abortion access on islands: Ireland, N. Ireland & Prince Edward Island

February 19, 2019

Congratulations to the authors and publishers of a new book, Crossing Troubled Waters: Abortion in Ireland, Northern Ireland and Prince Edward Island, which shines a light on two islands—Ireland (north and south) and Prince Edward Island, Canada—and considers for each island the nature of the discourse on  abortion, the impact of abortion restrictions, ongoing efforts to improve access, and recent activist successes.   Women living on islands face additional challenges in accessing abortion services because of their geographic isolation, including travel to other jurisdictions, which is financially and emotionally burdensome.

Crossing Troubled Waters: Abortion in Ireland, Northern Ireland, and Prince Edward Island, ed. Colleen MacQuarrie, Fiona Bloomer, Claire Pierson and Shannon Stettner (Charlottetown, PEI, Canada: Island Studies Press, 2018). 288 pages.      Publisher’s web page.

Table of Contents
Introduction
1.     Accounts of Accessing Abortion in Prince Edward Island: Canada’s Anti-Choice Island,  by Colleen MacQuarrie and Cathrine Chambers

2.     Conceivable Possibilities: Space, Stigma, and Subjectivity, by Angele DesRoches

3.     “Don’t Talk About It”: The Silenced Experiences of Allies and Advocates to Abortion Access in PEI,  by Emily Rutledge

4.     Feminist Liberation Psychology: Animating Systemic Change on Abortion Access in PEI, by Colleen MacQuarrie

5.     The Law of Stigma, Travel, and the Abortion-Free Island, by Joanna Erdman, previous version online here.

6.     The Irish Abortion Debate, by Ciara Meehan

7.     Mobility, Migrants and Abortion in Ireland, by Sinead Kennedy and Mary Gilmartin

8.      A “United” Kingdom:?: The 1967 Abortion Act and Northern Ireland, by Jennifer Thomson

9.     Anti-abortion Myths in Political Discourse, by Claire Pierson and Fiona Bloomer

10.     From Grassroots to Government: Arts engagement Strategies in Abortion Access Activism in Ireland   by Emma Campbell and Siobhan Clancy

11.    A Tale of Two Islands: From the Local to the Global/International Resonances, by Marlene Gerber Fried

Conclusion,  by Colleen MacQuarrie, Fiona Bloomer, Claire Pierson, and Shannon Stettner

To purchase print copy, see:   Publisher’s web page.

Or PDF copies may be bought and downloaded here from the UPEI bookstore.

__________________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.


Human rights impact of gender stereotyping in reproductive health care

February 19, 2019

Congratulations and thanks to Ciara O’Connell of the University of Pretoria’s Centre for Human Rights, and Christina Zampas,  a Fellow in the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program of the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law, whose co-authored article was recently published in the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics:

“The human rights impact of gender stereotyping in the context of reproductive health care,” by Ciara O’Connell and Christina Zampas,  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 144 (2019):  116–121.  PDF online here.

Abstract:
Gender stereotypes surrounding women’s reproductive health impede women’s access to essential reproductive healthcare and contribute to inequality more generally. Stereotyping in healthcare settings impedes women’s access to contraceptive information, services, and induced abortion, and lead to involuntary interventions in the context of sterilization. Decisions by human rights monitoring bodies, such as the Inter‐American Court of Human Rights’ case, IV v. Bolivia, which was a case concerned with the involuntary sterilization of a woman during childbirth, highlight how stereotypes in the context of providing health care can operate to strip women of their agency and decision‐making authority, deny them their right to informed consent, reinforce gender hierarchies and violate their reproductive rights. In the present article, IV v. Bolivia is examined as a case study with the objective being to highlight how, in the context of coercive sterilization, human rights law has been used to advance legal and ethical guidelines, including the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics’ (FIGO) own guidelines, on gender stereotyping and reproductive healthcare. The Inter‐American Court’s judgment in IV v. Bolivia illustrates the important role FIGO’s guidance can play in shaping human rights standards and provides guidance on the service provider’s role and responsibility in eliminating gender stereotypes and upholding and fulfilling human rights.

KEYWORDS
Ethical standards; FIGO guidelines; Forced sterilization; Human rights; Human rights law;  Informed consent; Inter-American Court of Human Rights; Stereotypes.
The published article is online here.
__________________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.